Navigation

Daily Archives: August 7, 2011

In this blog post, I like to be philosophical. So let me begin with saying that we all know math is a universal language right? If I’m wrong, then please pardon me. I believe in my deepest core that math is a universal language, and I sometimes imagine even aliens out there somewhere in different parts of our universe might be speaking in math, whether their math is more advance or otherwise. We can use math to see how our universe works, and so in a sense we can safely assume math is universally universe within this universe.

Going to the extreme scales, math works as well. Whether the scale of the universe or the scale of quantum universe, we know math will work when we really apply math to solve problems in the contexts of such impossible scales. Even if a scale is infinitely large or infinitely small, we know infinite is possible with math! How? We can’t really discount that infinitely large or small is the impossible, because it’s all about what comes after the infinite. Just imagine this, in the days without plane and jets and rockets, when we stared up into the sky, we could only think it as infinitely far. Then one day we got ourselves beyond those clouds with technology, suddenly the next infinite boundary would be the universe itself. So, we can see that infinite is not really infinite if we try, and infinite is really infinite by nature is super rare. We can say this in another way that infinite is the same as finite, because finite becomes infinite and infinite becomes finite. The universe is one of those perfect infinite/finite cases.

Why on earth am I ranting on infinite and finite? I’m not a math person at all, and I really mean it! Therefore, my speaking of infinite and finite must have a reason, right? Well, I’m not so sure if I call my curiosity of thinking that some higher being has a roadmap for everything that already was set in motion before time as a reason, because it’s rather a conjecture to some people and nonsense to many others. Let put the argument of common sense aside, and let get crazy. So, what am I mean by some higher being has a roadmap for everything that already was set in motion before time? Well, I’m trying to say that perhaps someone or some force very much like the almighty being that people called God had used math to calculate every jittering in every scales of every matter that composed of our universe and possibly other universes too if the theory about many universes in fact is the undeniable truth. However infinitely small or large the scales of things, it’s possible still for him/her to calculate things before time — as in knowing things before things even happen. How? Take a look at software that had been written by programmers in the past decades; from simple to sophisticated software, we can see that things were set in motion before the users actually use the software. So, I think math can allow calculation of the jittering of energy and matter and of all things within this universe to be drafted before time, and then with a snap of two fingers — he/she commanded all things to begin. We call that the big bang, I guess! Everything else happened and happens after will just have to be within the limitation of the calculation of such a being. This is why we do have the law of nature such as physics. By saying that, I realize we may have more than one law of physics, because another universe might carry a different law of physics.

Isn’t that a crazy idea? Well, I’m not a religious zealot! I can’t say I’m a Christian or Buddhist, because sometimes I feel I need both religions to get my days going. I’m not a person who hates science and think religions hold all the answers. In fact, I think religions need science and science needs religions. OK, to tell the truth, this is the new me, because in the past (i.e., in my very young age) when I was barely able to write a complete English sentence, I was totally into of believing Buddhas and God weren’t real and science was everything. To tell the truth, the new me believes in anything is possible, and so as long we aren’t sure about something, it’s best to assume there is something and that something is possible. Of course, the possibility that there isn’t anything is there, and so it’s too possible. You see?

The future is already here, well not quite but somewhat inspirational, I think! According to Gizmodo, automatons with futuristic aesthetic have zipped around Heathrow airport since April this year, and passengers can use them on demand basis. So, by staring at the image of these vehicles (image could be found on Gizmodo’s article “Alien-Looking Automatons Have Taken Over Heathrow Airport“), I think I’d seen them before. No, I’d never been to Heathrow airport so I could never have been on one of these futuristic vehicles. Perhaps, in one of those science fiction movies I’d watched that these automatons reminded me of something similar. Anyhow, Gizmodo has that these futuristic airport vehicles are known as Ultra PRTs and the creator of these awesome futuristic vehicles is BAA. Hmm… wondering if customers have to pay a fare to ride them. Nonetheless, airport is exciting again for me! USA needs to get this type of vehicles to our airports already!

My lawn has gotten worse since my lawnmower isn’t working for sometimes. Thinking of hiring a lawn care service, but I surmise it will be expensive. Some lawn care services will charge hefty price for first round of care even though your lawn is not excessively abandoned. I know couple people are willing to cut my lawn for $35 to $40 a pop, but that too can become rather expensive if you think about long term.

So, what are my options? Not much really, but I do have a plan! You see, I’ve had so many gas lawnmowers that failed me more than I want to remember! Searching Amazon, I see couple electric lawnmowers, some of them require cords and others don’t, are super affordable — I saw one that is in the price range of $350 plus, but not more than $390. Batteries of some electric lawnmowers are rechargeable, and each battery could last for awhile before you need to replace it with brand new one.

My decision is that I’m going to buy an electric lawnmower. I think my bad days with gas lawnmowers are numbered. Of course, new bad days can begin by having bad time with electric lawnmowers, but that is still to be seen.

If it’s up to you, what do you think about gas lawnmowers vs electric lawnmowers? Of course, we are comparing the two types of lawnmowers in general and not of specific models! Just the underlying technology itself is what I’m interesting in! Please leave out the greenhouse gas effect slashes global warming debate, because cutting grass twice a month, couple hours each time will probably not contribute much to the environmental problems, I think! Hoping to listen in to some of your comments/debate about electric lawnmowers vs gas lawnmowers in the comment section!

Yesterday, I’d written about OpenVPN and how awesome OpenVPN’s Shield Exchange could protect you while surfing public Internet connection (i.e., hotspots), but some of you may want to ask is it necessary to use VPN type of connection even though the websites you’re visiting have already applied HTTPS protocol? The answer is VPN type of connection will provide another layer of defense for your sessions. HTTPS will secure your web sessions by providing its unique encryption algorithm, but HTTPS is crackable by some hackers. When you add an extra layer of defense through the use of VPN connection, suddenly your Internet session will be way more secure; as if you’re encrypting your sessions twice, and VPN has its own unique encryption algorithm which differs from HTTPS.

Also, the big difference between HTTPS and VPN is that HTTPS requires website owners to buy SSL certificates, but VPN is initiating by users. Perhaps, you might not want somebody to sniff the data that you try to download from your home’s network while you’re sitting at Starbucks, and so VPN is a perfect type of secure network connection. As long you get a VPN connection going, you can basically forget about it and surf anywhere on the web and transferring any data across the network to wherever, knowing that your sessions will be secure and encrypted anyway. So, I’ve to say I prefer VPN sort of connection when I’ve to use a public Internet connection. Plus, VPN is additional layer to HTTPS connection/protocol.

Wendy Seltzer was convincing when she said that ISPs should only be the carriages and not otherwise, because the line between the carriages and content providers could get very blurry; not only the freedom of enjoying entertainment would be curbed, but other fields that are related to the Internet will also be curbed in a way that could be very negative for everyone. Even if she is wrong on that very idea, I can still see why it’s not a good idea of having carriages and content providers sleep on the same bed. Just imagine the power of their marriages, and people only have fewer choices to make when that happens. Competition will be impossible, because only major content providers will be able to pull ISPs’ legs.

Wendy Seltzer has a good analogy on how ISPs should be the carriages. She said that it’s like a telephone — people don’t want some bodies of authority to tell people who to talk to or what to say over the telephones, and so the carriages should be something similar to the telephones only. She emphasized on why net neutrality is important! Perhaps, she had made her analogy too simplistic when she said the carriages should be similar to telephones, but we know how customers feel when their freedom of using the Internet suddenly looks a lot more like a curfew from a dictatorship regime — only the big boys have the power to do whatever and the rest just have to do within the limitations that set up by the ones who are in power. You can say it does sound like life, but don’t you think it’s bad business to make it so obvious?

So, the whole idea of how the Internet Providers will be copyright cops sounds unpleasant to many people, I think! Sure, copyright must be protected at all cost, but I think carriages should be just that and not of trying to becoming some copyright cops. Why not letting the lawyers do their jobs? After all, these lawyers seem to be just fine and happy with going about to taking on copyright infringers, right? We can’t really allow the carriages to tell the ISPs to dictate who should be cut off from the Internet, because abusive situations can easily be happening at anytime.

What about the other groups of authority? They should have something to say about how ISPs should dictate the Internet too, right? Don’t tell me that other bodies of authority are surrendering their right to have their saying about how the carriages should behave, because I doubt that will be a good thing in the future for such bodies of authority, unless they want the entertainment industry to be the only body of authority to dictate how ISPs should behave, right?

Sure, you can say we’re only exaggerating, because it’s only about copyright and nothing more. But, aren’t we already have copyright law? Content providers should use the copyright law to their advantages in courts and not trying to influence how ISPs should behave. As how things go, such as ISPs are becoming copyright cops for the sake of making their new friends happy (i.e., major content providers), things can get really blurry and the idea of applying just law will not be that effective. Why even try to apply law when a whispering here and there can get things done easily (i.e., shutting or slowing down customers’ Internet connection or stopping small competitors from serving contents effectively), right?